Calvin Wan <calvinwan@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Original cover letter for context: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20221011232604.839941-1-calvinwan@xxxxxxxxxx/ > ... > Calvin Wan (5): > run-command: add duplicate_output_fn to run_processes_parallel_opts > submodule: strbuf variable rename > submodule: move status parsing into function > diff-lib: refactor match_stat_with_submodule > diff-lib: parallelize run_diff_files for submodules > > Documentation/config/submodule.txt | 12 ++ > diff-lib.c | 103 +++++++++++-- > run-command.c | 13 +- > run-command.h | 24 +++ > submodule.c | 229 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > submodule.h | 9 ++ > t/helper/test-run-command.c | 21 +++ > t/t0061-run-command.sh | 39 +++++ > t/t4027-diff-submodule.sh | 19 +++ > t/t7506-status-submodule.sh | 19 +++ > 10 files changed, 441 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) While the topic is marked as "Needs review" in the recent "What's cooking" reports, merging this topic also breaks the "linux-leaks" job by causing many tests fail: t3040-subprojects-basic.sh t4010-diff-pathspec.sh t4015-diff-whitespace.sh t4027-diff-submodule.sh t7403-submodule-sync.sh t7409-submodule-detached-work-tree.sh t7416-submodule-dash-url.sh t7450-bad-git-dotfiles.sh t7506-status-submodule.sh Two of the test scripts are touched by this topic, and their breakage could be caused by newly using other git subcommands that were known to be leaking (iow, not because this series introduced new leaks). It also is possible that they fail because this series added new leaks to the commands these two test scripts use. In either case, other tests that haven't been touched by this topic were definitely broken by new leaks introduced by the changes made by this series. Anybody interested should be able to see the breakage themselves by checking out 'seen' and running SANTIZE=leak GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=true \ make test to see the tree with all in-flight topics are clean, and then by running the same test after merging this topic to 'seen'. Thanks.
